According to the different legal systems of Roman, German and Common Law, the criminal security orders in Iran and England are largely different, and the nature and basis of their issuance and the authorities and procedures of their issuance have differences and similarities. In general, criminal bail orders are issued with the aim of guaranteeing the presence of the accused at a specific time and place, and the variety of these orders is different according to the Bail Act 1976 and Article 217 of the Criminal Procedure Law approved on 12/4/92 with subsequent amendments. . In English law, the addition of conditions to bail or surety is foreseen, and also the possession of surety and surety is recognized as a right for the accused, and the issuance of any type of them is objectionable, while in Iranian law, arrest The issuance of the two aforementioned orders and the temporary arrest order can be appealed.Regarding competent authorities in issuing security orders, in Iranian law, prosecutors, assistant prosecutors, investigators, and court judges, and in English law, judges of magistrate courts and criminal and appeal courts have jurisdiction, and one of the most important differences is the delegation of authority to issue security orders to Bajilan (police) in English law is against Iranian law

In Iran, Indonesia, and Malaysia, abortion due to rape. has turned into a social issue, and on the other hand, in some of these countries, the difficulties in this field have been doubled due to lack of decision of laws. In Iranian law, abortion due to rape has not been clearly decided by the legislator, and abortion is allowed only subject to certain conditions just in paragraphs “A”, “B”, and “C” of the Article 56 of the Family Protection and Population Youth Law. In general, it should be acknowledged that even if it was possible under Iranian law, abortion due to rape would only be permissible under Article 56 of the Family Protection and Population Youth Law. However, the legislator of Indonesia has explicitly addressed abortion due to rape. in its laws, and if there are conditions, it is possible to have an abortion up to the 40th or 42nd day of pregnancy according to the words of Shafi'i jurist. Moreover, Malaysian law does not explicitly specify the permits for abortion due to rape; however, according to the existing criteria set by the legislator, such a permit may be considered.

Nowadays, environmental protection and consequently soil conservation have been considered in the criminal policy of different legal systems. To recognizing the criminal policy of three Iran, Iraq, and United Arab Emirates Countries in soil conservation in the form of a case study and analytical-descriptive method, the current study tried to investigate the Positive Law to identify the political criminal reaction of these three countries in confrontation with harmful behaviors to soil. First, damages to the soil and then Positive Law and the taken criminal policy in each field have been investigated to clarify government’s approaches to the environment in general and to the soil in particular, considering that the center of attention of criminal policy is environmental protection as a fundamental value or it is dependent on human and his interest. Recognizing these components substantively and the responsibility of the criminal policy of these three countries to the criminal phenomenon (including crime and deviation) in terms of form specify their criminal policy position in the categorization of big criminal policy systems; finally, this study showed that human-oriented approach to environment has overcome ecological protection balance and considering cognitive model, the criminal policy of all three countries is near to liberal government-society in the field of soil conservation.

The implication of partial defence of loss of control in the criminal system of England is that the accused loses his or her self-control, because of fear or heat of passion resulting from provocative act of victim, and killing a person. Although the loss of control has an important role in this defence and must be proven objectively and subjectively but the unjust act of victim is one of the two essential requirements of this defence. With respect to the important effect of victim in this defence, we did a comparative study on the partial defence of loss of control and self-defence in Iranian legal system. By explaining and distinguishing several situations witch deems these defences overlapped, we express some cases can only be subject to the partial daefence of loss of control. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that due to acceptance of the self-defense, it is not necessary to recognize the partial defence of loss of control in penal code. Actually we, by using the descriptive-analytical method based on library sources, describing and analyzing laws, realized these two defences are distinguished in their area, nature, affection and requirements. Eventually this article attempts to introduce a draft of the defence of loss of control compatible with bases of Iranian legal system.